Posted on 06/04/2023 2:41:00 PM PDT by Twotone
#ITEM #2 The WHO has officially published the latest version of the “Bureau’s Text” of the “Framework Convention.” (I refuse to call it an “accord” or “treaty.”)
PLEASE FORGET EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE EVER HEARD ABOUT THIS PROPOSED AGREEMENT - EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT PREVIOUS VERSIONS IS NOW OUT OF DATE AND LIKELY TO BE INACCURATE.
https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/e/e_inb-5-resumed-session.html
https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb5/A_INB5_6-en.pdf
I have previously written a number of articles about the unedited draft version of the “Bureau’s Text” which are summarized in the video below…
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesroguski.substack.com ...
Who?
No. WHO!
That’s right.
WHO’s on first,
What’s on second,
Idontknow’s on third,
Yesterday is pitching to Tomorrow...
That’s right.
WHO’s on first,
What’s on second,
Idontknow’s on third,
Yesterday is pitching to Tomorrow...
There was a video with Dr. John Campbell in which James Roguski says there is an 18 month period for rejection of this agreement, of which 12 months have already passed. If there is a material change in the conditions or text of the agreement, is it not reasonable and just that the 18 month clock be restarted?
A music video of the Who?! Are Entwhistle and Moon still alive?
One of the things with people in the news is they try to move fast. If this had a written list of bullet points, lots of people will skim them, and if they are catchy, you will get coverage.
The problem with this is, it is another, watch this video, and listen to this two hour interview on audiotape, with no indication of why it might be interesting.
People will assume, if this treaty said we will have to sacrifice five infants per year to Molloch, it would be in the headline, or at least in the blurb. As it stands, this will get classified in their mind as just another two hour audio interview which rehashes something they already read elsewhere, and they will skip it. Nobody has two hours for an audio interview, which might have nothing new, that is in the business.
The video was a prior posting. The new piece was the actual statement from the WHO, which had not been released yet. And the link provided access to that pdf in a downloadable format. Those who are following this probably understood that. I doubt that Roguski had read the whole thing at the time he posted in order to put out bullet points. But I’m sure he’ll be posting more in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.